Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 9776, 2022 06 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890259

ABSTRACT

Parosmia, distorted smell sensations, is a common consequence of respiratory virus infections. The phenomenon is not well understood in terms of its impact and long-term outcomes. We examined self-reported experiences of parosmia in a population-based sample from the Betula study that was conducted in Umeå in northern Sweden (baseline data collected in 1998-2000). We used a baseline sample of 2168 individuals aged 35-90 years and with no cognitive impairment at baseline. We investigated the prevalence of parosmia experiences and, using regression analyses, its relationship to other olfactory and cognitive variables and quality of life. Benefitting from the longitudinal study design, we also assessed the persistence of parosmia over 5 and 10 years prospectively. Parosmia experiences were prevalent in 4.8% of the population and it often co-occurred with phantosmia ("olfactory hallucinations"), but was not associated with lower self-rated overall quality of life or poor performance on olfactory or cognitive tests. For some individuals, parosmia was retained 5 years (17.0%) or even 10 years later (10.3%). Thus, parosmia experiences are commonly reported in the population, and can be persistent for some individuals, but might be mostly benign in nature. Our work complements research on clinical-level parosmia, which is typically more severe, and recent parosmia reports during the COVID-19 pandemic, where long-term outcomes are still unknown.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Olfaction Disorders/complications , Olfaction Disorders/epidemiology , Pandemics , Quality of Life , Smell
2.
Frontiers in Education ; 7, 2022.
Article in English | Scopus | ID: covidwho-1793034

ABSTRACT

Gender related vulnerabilities and inequalities place female learners at high risk of school disengagement due to COVID-19 disruptions. Understanding the impacts of school closures and educational disruptions on female learners in South Africa is critical to inform appropriate, gender-sensitive policies, and programs, to mitigate further exacerbation of educational inequalities. We examined the effects that COVID-19 and lockdowns have had on the educational experiences of adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) aged 15–24, in six districts of South Africa characterized by high rates of HIV, teenage pregnancy and socio-economic hardship. Following a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods approach, we conducted a cross-sectional survey with 515 AGYW, and qualitative interviews with 50 AGYW. More than half of survey participants enrolled in education had been unable to continue with their studies. Factors associated with educational disruption included low socio-economic status, lack of cell phone access and household food insecurity. Qualitative narratives included challenges with online learning and studying at home in resource restricted settings, and insufficient support from schools and teachers. However, despite multiple barriers to continuing education, some AGYW demonstrated educational resilience, enabled by psychosocial and structural support, and resource access. Our findings lend support to an emerging evidence base showing that the closure of schools and tertiary institutions, combined with challenging home environments, and a lack of access to appropriate technology, has disproportionately impacted the most vulnerable AGYW, exacerbating pre-existing educational inequalities within the South African education system. Addressing structural barriers to educational equity, particularly in the pandemic context, including access of technology and the internet, is urgent. Copyright © 2022 Duby, Jonas, Bunce, Bergh, Maruping, Fowler, Reddy, Govindasamy and Mathews.

3.
J Water Health ; 20(2): 287-299, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1760068

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in over 340 million infection cases (as of 21 January 2022) and more than 5.57 million deaths globally. In reaction, science, technology and innovation communities across the globe have organised themselves to contribute to national responses to COVID-19 disease. A significant contribution has been from the establishment of wastewater-based epidemiological (WBE) surveillance interventions and programmes for monitoring the spread of COVID-19 in at least 55 countries. Here, we examine and share experiences and lessons learnt in establishing such surveillance programmes. We use case studies to highlight testing methods and logistics considerations associated in scaling the implementing of such programmes in South Africa, the Netherlands, Turkey and England. The four countries were selected to represent different regions of the world and the perspective based on the considerable progress made in establishing and implementing their national WBE programmes. The selected countries also represent different climatic zones, economies, and development stages, which influence the implementation of national programmes of this nature and magnitude. In addition, the four countries' programmes offer good experiences and lessons learnt since they are systematic, and cover extensive areas, disseminate knowledge locally and internationally and partnered with authorities (government). The programmes also strengthened working relations and partnerships between and among local and global organisations. This paper shares these experiences and lessons to encourage others in the water and public health sectors on the benefits and value of WBE in tackling SARS-CoV-2 and related future circumstances.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Wastewater , South Africa , Netherlands/epidemiology , Turkey/epidemiology
4.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0255501, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1362085

ABSTRACT

With more than 82 million cases worldwide and almost two million deaths, the Covid-19 global pandemic shows little sign of abating. However, its effect on quality of life (QoL) in skin cancer patients has not been systematically evaluated to date. Given that QoL impairments may be associated with increased psychological morbidity, and may interfere with engagement with cancer therapy and follow-up, we prospectively evaluated quality of life in skin cancer patients using the Covid-19 Emotional Impact Survey (C-19EIS) and the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires. 101 patients (48 females and 53 males) completed both questionnaires. The mean C-19EIS score was 3.8 on a scale from 0 (no impact) to 12 (severe impact). Patients undergoing systemic therapy showed significantly impaired physical (p = 0.006) and social functioning (p = 0.003). However, when compared to the published normative EORTC QLQ-C30 data, there was no evidence that the Covid-19 pandemic had significantly impacted upon overall quality of life. Subscales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 were significantly inversely correlated with the C-19EIS, validating its use in skin cancer patients. Despite the Covid-19 pandemic, skin cancer patients in our tertiary referral center were surprisingly resilient. However, given the geographical variations in the rates of Sars-CoV-2 infection it is possible that the low incidence in Northern Germany may have resulted in a lack of general QoL impairments. Multi-center studies are required to further determine the impact of Covid-19 on psychological wellbeing in skin cancer patients in order to develop supportive interventions and to ensure that engagement with cancer care services is maintained in order to enable early detection of cancer progression and/or recurrence.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Quality of Life/psychology , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/psychology , Female , Germany , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Resilience, Psychological , Skin Neoplasms/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Tertiary Care Centers , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
5.
Iperception ; 12(3): 20416695211023953, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269861

ABSTRACT

There are currently few ways to reliably and objectively assess olfaction outside of the research laboratory or clinic. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for remote olfactory assessment; in particular, smell training at home is a promising method for olfactory rehabilitation, but further methodological advances might enhance its effectiveness and range of use. Here, we present Exerscent, a portable, low-cost olfactory display designed primarily for uses outside of the laboratory and that can be operated with a personal computer. Exerscent includes Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags that are attached to odor stimuli and read with a MFRC522 module RFID reader/antenna that encodes the odor in order to provide adaptive challenges for the user (e.g., an odor identification task). Hardware parts are commercially available or 3D printed. Instructions and code for building the Exerscent are freely available online (https://osf.io/kwftm/). As a proof of concept, we present a case study in which a participant trained daily to identify 54 odors, improving from 81% to 96% accuracy over 16 consecutive days. In addition, results from a laboratory experiment with 11 volunteers indicated a very high level of perceived usability and engagement. Exerscent may be used for olfactory skills development (e.g., perfumery, enology), and rehabilitation purposes (e.g., postviral olfactory loss), but it also allows for other forms of technological interactions such as olfactory-based recreational interactions.

6.
Trends Cogn Sci ; 25(6): 419-420, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253683
7.
Chem Senses ; 462021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990574

ABSTRACT

In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19-; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: -82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19-: -59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.


Subject(s)
Anosmia/diagnosis , COVID-19/diagnosis , Adult , Anosmia/etiology , COVID-19/complications , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Self Report , Smell
8.
Richard C. Gerkin; Kathrin Ohla; Maria Geraldine Veldhuizen; Paule V. Joseph; Christine E. Kelly; Alyssa J. Bakke; Kimberley E. Steele; Michael C. Farruggia; Robert Pellegrino; Marta Y. Pepino; Cédric Bouysset; Graciela M. Soler; Veronica Pereda-Loth; Michele Dibattista; Keiland W. Cooper; Ilja Croijmans; Antonella Di Pizio; M. Hakan Ozdener; Alexander W. Fjaeldstad; Cailu Lin; Mari A. Sandell; Preet B. Singh; V. Evelyn Brindha; Shannon B. Olsson; Luis R. Saraiva; Gaurav Ahuja; Mohammed K. Alwashahi; Surabhi Bhutani; Anna D'Errico; Marco A. Fornazieri; Jérôme Golebiowski; Liang-Dar Hwang; Lina Öztürk; Eugeni Roura; Sara Spinelli; Katherine L. Whitcroft; Farhoud Faraji; Florian Ph.S Fischmeister; Thomas Heinbockel; Julien W. Hsieh; Caroline Huart; Iordanis Konstantinidis; Anna Menini; Gabriella Morini; Jonas K. Olofsson; Carl M. Philpott; Denis Pierron; Vonnie D. C. Shields; Vera V. Voznessenskaya; Javier Albayay; Aytug Altundag; Moustafa Bensafi; María Adelaida Bock; Orietta Calcinoni; William Fredborg; Christophe Laudamiel; Juyun Lim; Johan N. Lundström; Alberto Macchi; Pablo Meyer; Shima T. Moein; Enrique Santamaría; Debarka Sengupta; Paloma Paloma Domínguez; Hüseyin Yanık; Sanne Boesveldt; Jasper H. B. de Groot; Caterina Dinnella; Jessica Freiherr; Tatiana Laktionova; Sajidxa Mariño; Erminio Monteleone; Alexia Nunez-Parra; Olagunju Abdulrahman; Marina Ritchie; Thierry Thomas-Danguin; Julie Walsh-Messinger; Rashid Al Abri; Rafieh Alizadeh; Emmanuelle Bignon; Elena Cantone; Maria Paola Cecchini; Jingguo Chen; Maria Dolors Guàrdia; Kara C. Hoover; Noam Karni; Marta Navarro; Alissa A. Nolden; Patricia Portillo Mazal; Nicholas R. Rowan; Atiye Sarabi-Jamab; Nicholas S. Archer; Ben Chen; Elizabeth A. Di Valerio; Emma L. Feeney; Johannes Frasnelli; Mackenzie Hannum; Claire Hopkins; Hadar Klein; Coralie Mignot; Carla Mucignat; Yuping Ning; Elif E. Ozturk; Mei Peng; Ozlem Saatci; Elizabeth A. Sell; Carol H. Yan; Raul Alfaro; Cinzia Cecchetto; Gérard Coureaud; Riley D. Herriman; Jeb M. Justice; Pavan Kumar Kaushik; Sachiko Koyama; Jonathan B. Overdevest; Nicola Pirastu; Vicente A. Ramirez; S. Craig Roberts; Barry C. Smith; Hongyuan Cao; Hong Wang; Patrick Balungwe; Marius Baguma; Thomas Hummel; John E. Hayes; Danielle R. Reed; Masha Y. Niv; Steven D. Munger; Valentina Parma.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.07.22.20157263

ABSTRACT

Background: COVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. Methods: This preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Results: Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean{+/-}SD, C19+: -82.5{+/-}27.2 points; C19-: -59.8{+/-}37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing no significant model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. Conclusions: As smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings [≤]2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (10


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Fever , Olfaction Disorders , Cough
9.
Valentina Parma; Kathrin Ohla; Maria G. Veldhuizen; Masha Y. Niv; Christine E. Kelly; Alyssa J. Bakke; Keiland W. Cooper; Cédric Bouysset; Nicola Pirastu; Michele Dibattista; Rishemjit Kaur; Marco Tullio Liuzza; Marta Y. Pepino; Veronika Schöpf; Veronica Pereda-Loth; Shannon B Olsson; Richard C Gerkin; Paloma Rohlfs Domínguez; Javier Albayay; Michael C. Farruggia; Surabhi Bhutani; Alexander W Fjaeldstad; Ritesh Kumar; Anna Menini; Moustafa Bensafi; Mari Sandell; Iordanis Konstantinidis; Antonella Di Pizio; Federica Genovese; Lina Öztürk; Thierry Thomas-Danguin; Johannes Frasnelli; Sanne Boesveldt; Özlem Saatci; Luis R. Saraiva; Cailu Lin; Jérôme Golebiowski; Liang-Dar Hwang; Mehmet Hakan Ozdener; Maria Dolors Guàrdia; Christophe Laudamiel; Marina Ritchie; Jan Havlícek; Denis Pierron; Eugeni Roura; Marta Navarro; Alissa A. Nolden; Juyun Lim; KL Whitcroft; Lauren R. Colquitt; Camille Ferdenzi; Evelyn V. Brindha; Aytug Altundag; Alberto Macchi; Alexia Nunez-Parra; Zara M. Patel; Sébastien Fiorucci; Carl M. Philpott; Barry C. Smith; Johan N Lundström; Carla Mucignat; Jane K. Parker; Mirjam van den Brink; Michael Schmuker; Florian Ph.S Fischmeister; Thomas Heinbockel; Vonnie D.C. Shields; Farhoud Faraji; Enrique Enrique Santamaría; William E.A. Fredborg; Gabriella Morini; Jonas K. Olofsson; Maryam Jalessi; Noam Karni; Anna D'Errico; Rafieh Alizadeh; Robert Pellegrino; Pablo Meyer; Caroline Huart; Ben Chen; Graciela M. Soler; Mohammed K. Alwashahi; Olagunju Abdulrahman; Antje Welge-Lüssen; Pamela Dalton; Jessica Freiherr; Carol H. Yan; Jasper H. B. de Groot; Vera V. Voznessenskaya; Hadar Klein; Jingguo Chen; Masako Okamoto; Elizabeth A. Sell; Preet Bano Singh; Julie Walsh-Messinger; Nicholas S. Archer; Sachiko Koyama; Vincent Deary; S. Craig Roberts; Hüseyin Yanik; Samet Albayrak; Lenka Martinec Novákov; Ilja Croijmans; Patricia Portillo Mazal; Shima T. Moein; Eitan Margulis; Coralie Mignot; Sajidxa Mariño; Dejan Georgiev; Pavan K. Kaushik; Bettina Malnic; Hong Wang; Shima Seyed-Allaei; Nur Yoluk; Sara Razzaghi; Jeb M. Justice; Diego Restrepo; Julien W Hsieh; Danielle R. Reed; Thomas Hummel; Steven D Munger; John E Hayes.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.05.04.20090902

ABSTRACT

Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, generally lacked quantitative measurements, were mostly restricted to data from single countries. Here, we report the development, implementation and initial results of a multi-lingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in three distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, 8 other, ages 19-79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change+/-100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (-79.7+/- 28.7, mean+/- SD), taste (-69.0+/- 32.6), and chemesthetic (-37.3+/- 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell, but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL